I applaud The Denver Post for endorsing the University of Colorado at Boulder’s forthcoming review of its outdated undergraduate classroom experiments on hundreds of animals. As a CU-Boulder alumnus, I also commend the school’s effort, but it shouldn’t have taken action by PETA to prompt it.

Currently, among other things, students decapitate frogs and experiment on their organs and cut open live rats to administer drugs to their beating hearts.

It’s been reported that sister school CU-Denver doesn’t experiment on any live animals in its undergraduate courses. And 98 percent of U.S. medical schools no longer use any animal laboratories to teach medical students. This includes pharmacology, physiology and even surgical training. Physicians-in-training are now taught with humanlike mannequins, computer simulators and other non-animal methods.

A switch to more modern and effective teaching methods at CU-Boulder is clearly possible and could be made overnight if there was the political will to do so. Hopefully, after this review, there will be.

Brian Field, Thornton

This letter was published in the July 6 edition.

The high point of the animal physiology courses I taught to undergraduates for 40 years was small animal survival surgery, performed by the students under careful supervision after thorough preparation. I discussed the ethics of animal experimentation, taught them how to administer and monitor anesthesia, and showed them that anyone can do surgery with proper training — providing them a tremendous boost in self-confidence. When rats would occasionally go into respiratory arrest, bringing them back to life (as carefully instructed) was a euphoric experience that no computer could simulate. Many students considered their surgical experience the high point of their undergraduate years.

I don’t disagree with CU’s review of animal use in the undergraduate curriculum, but hope that a total ban will be avoided. Properly supervised, humane animal experimentation provides students with one of the most valuable lessons they can learn — about life, ethics and themselves.

Louis Irwin, Denver

This letter was published in the July 6 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here[2]. Follow eLetters[3] on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

1 Comment To "Animal testing in University of Colorado classrooms (2 letters)"

#1 Comment By Robtf777 On July 5, 2013 @ 11:34 pm

Boulder may or may not have two……moral and ethical…..problems.

One deals with CU and its “use” of animals.

The other has to do with a certain doctor……and his “abortions” of living human lives.

Guess which issue is the subject of these Letters…..and the ones yesterday?

It really seems that some people care more about how we humans treat…..mere animals…..mere rodents……mere “vermin”……than some people care about how we humans care about…….50 million living human lives who were killed……in pretty much disgusting and despicable ways that no one would want a puppy or a kitten killed.

And the Sad Thing is that “animal rights” and “living human lives rights” are NOT a “Just ONE and NOT the other” situation.